Hi folks:
It is with deep regret that I announce my departure from this forum. I enjoyed my brief stay here. Some of you exchanged nice information with me. A few not so nice. There are 4 reasons that forced my decision to exit. Let me list them here.
1. There is a "qualified" and "well-informed" nurse from Brisbane/Australia (?) who may be routinely good at doing what his doctors ordered but lacks basic knowledge in science. That, by itself, is not a crime because every job requires certain skills and so long as you display them you can hold your job. But to venture into giving explanations that is not your forte is not a wise thing to do. I am referring to the remarks such as "alcohol has sugar and should not be used to clean", "alcohol wipes give higher blood sugar values", which is then changed to "low values" etc. I gave the explanation that alcohol does not contain sugar, the alcohol used is called iso-propyl alcohol which is used to soak a polymer cloth which is placed inside a sealed pouch and the occasional low values for blood sugar when using the wipes is due to incomplete drying after wiping which will cause a dilution of the blood drawn etc. This nurse was annoyed at such explanations. Another time he said the blood sugar registered 0.02. That is very very low (on the hypoglycemic scale) value and the person would have collapsed. I offered the explanation that the patient would have emptied a bottle of vodka. Instead this nurse announced it was due to the alcohol wipes. When queried further he said alcohol wipes (used for cleaning the bed etc.,) were made available to the patient and the patient consumed them---perhaps by licking the wipes--hundreds of them!!! So there were so many inconsistencies which I needed to correct as a scientist. That started a barrage of four letter words from him. The very first outburst came into my mailbox, not from him as a private message but it was from Tamilbrahmins.com. In that sense it is PUBLIC MESSAGE. Also the nurse does not know my personal email address. The only way he could send me a personal message is to use the "private message" button in the TB site. The message that I got did not go there. It was posted in the thread and TB sent the mail to me. For more on that read the penultimate paragraph at the bottom of this message. This nurse continued to shower more abusive language and challenged me to report them all. He has escaped unscathed for all that. That tells me this site is morally corrupt and that anybody could use foul language. That is not the case with some other forums where I participate. The first instance of such words appearing in print means expulsion of that member.
Now there is a doctor member from Malaysia who is waiting in the wings to come to "help" her buddies. She is the one who certified the nurse to be "well informed". Maybe she knows that fact via long distance vision because she is in Malaysia and the nurse is in Australia, thousand or more miles apart. You know who she is. She is the one who recites gAyatri mantra to find a collapsed vein in a patient who is in coma. I am wondering if a recorder playing the mantra would have gotten the patient back on his feet without the oral prayer from this doctor. A doctor is required to have technical competence to handle an ill patient. Otherwise a priest can do that job by the bedside.
Next there is an engineer who is also waiting to rush to the side of those who are "victimized". The first tool he has is the web. He goes to the google site, types a few words and whatever pops up he copy/pastes in the thread even if he had no basic knowledge in that field. Even in the web there are contradictory info scattered around and one needs fundamental knowledge to sort them out. Incomplete understanding goads him to make smart aleck remarks. You would have noticed more of them by now.
Finally we have a moderator who likes to jump the gun without investigating all the details. I reported a few abusive language-containing posts to him. He ignored them. Instead he wrote in the thread that I violated a basic rule by posting a private message in the public forum. I copy/pasted the particular message that came into my personal email inbox and showed him that it came from Tamilbrahmins.com. First he denied it but later said it was the server that sends such messages. I don't care who sent it. Tamilbrahmins uses the server as the vehicle for such storage, and transmission. Also when you get a message from TB into your email inbox if you hit "reply", it will go to Tamilbrahmins.com. So he knows Tamilbrahmins.com is the originator there and not the particular poster. When this was made known to him he relented and edited his post in the thread which accused me at the beginning and even the edited version said that the "message MAY not have been private". Why "may" when he is sure that it WAS NOT? What happened to the nurse who used the abusive language repeatedly in several posts (all of them are now in my archives, by the way) and was proudly admitting sending them? Nothing. He later on went back in a cowardly fashion to delete most of them or it may be the admin who deleted them. If the admin did it what did he do with the perpetrator---let him go scotch-free? If so anybody can use the four letter words in the forum without any consequences--right? If the perpetrator admitted to using them openly in the form, he should also be castigated publicly in the forum if the forum has any moral and ethical standards. So far nothing in that regard.
Now coming to an explanation of the "private message" being made public. Let us take an example here. There is a drama on a stage. Lots of people in the audience. One actress suddenly appears on the stage semi-nude. There are lots of "oohs" and "awhs". Some people take video of that scene since they are all ready with their videocams. The actress knowing what she did runs to the back of the stage and never comes back to the stage out of shame (read :foul message deleted completely) or gets properly clothed and reappears on the stage ( read: message edited). Now people who have captured the scene on video have it as evidence (public knowledge) that the actress appeared semi-nude. Now, can the actress claim that the video capture was an invasion of privacy and should not be published? It was all on the stage for everyone to see. If only the video capture was done backstage when the actress was preparing to dress herself up then it is invasion of privacy. Not in this case. So I hope you are clear about the "private message" confusion. The video capture that I am talking in this case is equivalent to my storing the message transmitted to me by tamilbrahmins.
So I hope everything is clear to you now. Best wishes to all of you. My plate is also full with other activities. I will miss some of you who have been very congenial and responded to my messages in that way. Goodbye!
It is with deep regret that I announce my departure from this forum. I enjoyed my brief stay here. Some of you exchanged nice information with me. A few not so nice. There are 4 reasons that forced my decision to exit. Let me list them here.
1. There is a "qualified" and "well-informed" nurse from Brisbane/Australia (?) who may be routinely good at doing what his doctors ordered but lacks basic knowledge in science. That, by itself, is not a crime because every job requires certain skills and so long as you display them you can hold your job. But to venture into giving explanations that is not your forte is not a wise thing to do. I am referring to the remarks such as "alcohol has sugar and should not be used to clean", "alcohol wipes give higher blood sugar values", which is then changed to "low values" etc. I gave the explanation that alcohol does not contain sugar, the alcohol used is called iso-propyl alcohol which is used to soak a polymer cloth which is placed inside a sealed pouch and the occasional low values for blood sugar when using the wipes is due to incomplete drying after wiping which will cause a dilution of the blood drawn etc. This nurse was annoyed at such explanations. Another time he said the blood sugar registered 0.02. That is very very low (on the hypoglycemic scale) value and the person would have collapsed. I offered the explanation that the patient would have emptied a bottle of vodka. Instead this nurse announced it was due to the alcohol wipes. When queried further he said alcohol wipes (used for cleaning the bed etc.,) were made available to the patient and the patient consumed them---perhaps by licking the wipes--hundreds of them!!! So there were so many inconsistencies which I needed to correct as a scientist. That started a barrage of four letter words from him. The very first outburst came into my mailbox, not from him as a private message but it was from Tamilbrahmins.com. In that sense it is PUBLIC MESSAGE. Also the nurse does not know my personal email address. The only way he could send me a personal message is to use the "private message" button in the TB site. The message that I got did not go there. It was posted in the thread and TB sent the mail to me. For more on that read the penultimate paragraph at the bottom of this message. This nurse continued to shower more abusive language and challenged me to report them all. He has escaped unscathed for all that. That tells me this site is morally corrupt and that anybody could use foul language. That is not the case with some other forums where I participate. The first instance of such words appearing in print means expulsion of that member.
Now there is a doctor member from Malaysia who is waiting in the wings to come to "help" her buddies. She is the one who certified the nurse to be "well informed". Maybe she knows that fact via long distance vision because she is in Malaysia and the nurse is in Australia, thousand or more miles apart. You know who she is. She is the one who recites gAyatri mantra to find a collapsed vein in a patient who is in coma. I am wondering if a recorder playing the mantra would have gotten the patient back on his feet without the oral prayer from this doctor. A doctor is required to have technical competence to handle an ill patient. Otherwise a priest can do that job by the bedside.
Next there is an engineer who is also waiting to rush to the side of those who are "victimized". The first tool he has is the web. He goes to the google site, types a few words and whatever pops up he copy/pastes in the thread even if he had no basic knowledge in that field. Even in the web there are contradictory info scattered around and one needs fundamental knowledge to sort them out. Incomplete understanding goads him to make smart aleck remarks. You would have noticed more of them by now.
Finally we have a moderator who likes to jump the gun without investigating all the details. I reported a few abusive language-containing posts to him. He ignored them. Instead he wrote in the thread that I violated a basic rule by posting a private message in the public forum. I copy/pasted the particular message that came into my personal email inbox and showed him that it came from Tamilbrahmins.com. First he denied it but later said it was the server that sends such messages. I don't care who sent it. Tamilbrahmins uses the server as the vehicle for such storage, and transmission. Also when you get a message from TB into your email inbox if you hit "reply", it will go to Tamilbrahmins.com. So he knows Tamilbrahmins.com is the originator there and not the particular poster. When this was made known to him he relented and edited his post in the thread which accused me at the beginning and even the edited version said that the "message MAY not have been private". Why "may" when he is sure that it WAS NOT? What happened to the nurse who used the abusive language repeatedly in several posts (all of them are now in my archives, by the way) and was proudly admitting sending them? Nothing. He later on went back in a cowardly fashion to delete most of them or it may be the admin who deleted them. If the admin did it what did he do with the perpetrator---let him go scotch-free? If so anybody can use the four letter words in the forum without any consequences--right? If the perpetrator admitted to using them openly in the form, he should also be castigated publicly in the forum if the forum has any moral and ethical standards. So far nothing in that regard.
Now coming to an explanation of the "private message" being made public. Let us take an example here. There is a drama on a stage. Lots of people in the audience. One actress suddenly appears on the stage semi-nude. There are lots of "oohs" and "awhs". Some people take video of that scene since they are all ready with their videocams. The actress knowing what she did runs to the back of the stage and never comes back to the stage out of shame (read :foul message deleted completely) or gets properly clothed and reappears on the stage ( read: message edited). Now people who have captured the scene on video have it as evidence (public knowledge) that the actress appeared semi-nude. Now, can the actress claim that the video capture was an invasion of privacy and should not be published? It was all on the stage for everyone to see. If only the video capture was done backstage when the actress was preparing to dress herself up then it is invasion of privacy. Not in this case. So I hope you are clear about the "private message" confusion. The video capture that I am talking in this case is equivalent to my storing the message transmitted to me by tamilbrahmins.
So I hope everything is clear to you now. Best wishes to all of you. My plate is also full with other activities. I will miss some of you who have been very congenial and responded to my messages in that way. Goodbye!
